I trust people who make predictions about elections. I have contempt for everyone who analyzes an election after it happens. That is called rationalizing.
I expect this election to go overwhelmingly to Bush, much like the ‘72 Nixon-McGovern and ‘84 Reagan-Mondale incumbent landslides. Kerry should get no more than five states.
My explanation of why it might not happen, if it doesn’t, is that there is a different big issue being voted on. I think the vote may be about the confluence of two large trends: modernity and leadership.
One long-term trend is modernity. Americans are more comfortable with the development of modernity than most people in the world. We seem quite satisfied with our modern lives. The exception to this satisfaction is the Lefties who are sentimental about the past. Lefties are sentimental about the good old days of labor unions, welfare, the Great Socialist dream, the small farmer and the small town neighborhood.
The other long-term trend is toward America as the global leader, the world hegemon. America didn’t ask for this role and many Americans don’t want the burden.
I see a confluence of these two trends. Modernity includes a high level of selfishness, self-satisfaction, hedonism and radical individualism. Leadership, on the other hand, is the uninvited global burden, is an unwelcome intrusion on radical individualism.
These two trends may be in conflict and the conflict may be expressed by voters in this election.
This confluence means internal emotional conflict. This modernist-leadership conflict may be what we will see in the 2004 election.